This Story is Archived
9-11 Commission Members Suspected Deception by Pentagon »
Posted by: Neophile 2 years, 1 month agoSome staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission.
Read Full Story at washingtonpost.com »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 663
-
Virginia
Aug. 2, 2006, 1:20 a.m.We need a truth commission or special prosecutor on this. I guess 9-11 is just not going away without placing some blame on people that were responsible for our safety that day.
-
-
AbuSofar
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:06 p.m.Kinda gives a little credence to those so call conspiracy theories now doesn't it
-
Pike
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:47 p.m.blame lays squarely on the shoulders of Cheney, George and the Israeli secrete service
-
Slyfox
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:48 p.m.Truth for the United States people!
Stop the lies the Bush administration use to push forward their agenda.
Peace!
-
genesimmons
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:48 p.m.Of course former SecNav Lehman would say there isn't evidence to warrant a criminal investigation. He's one of those Bohemian grove attendees in the past, whose shown that he's now part of the Neo-Con support group.
-
stephen-johnson
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:55 p.m."Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said."
It seems to me that the people involvd were trying to cover their incompetent @$$es, and were not participating in the conspiracy that the 9/11 "truth" movement claims that the government is covering up.
Not one word about bombs being placed in the Twin Towers or controlled demolition in the article. The elation of those duped by the 9/11 "truth" movement on this board will be short lived, as usual.
-
Klittle123
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:56 p.m.Oh more lies, whoa what a surprise there.
votetoimpeach.org
Vote to impeach Bush
-
Krazymk
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:57 p.m.So there's a conspirocy of people looking to not lose their jobs. What a big surprise. None of this changes who hi-jacked those planes and crashed two into the World Trade Center towers and one into the Pentagon. All that this says is that the people who were supposed to be watching the skies were asleep on the job.
-
Dsb2k6
Aug. 2, 2006, 2:59 p.m.What will it take before our corrupted government officials are held accountable for their actions? Really. One of you Bushheads please tell me. Can he do no wrong in your eyes?
There IS a conspiracy to take away our individual freedoms by any means neccesary. You are either for it or against it. It will be a sad day when the trees that Bush has planted bear fruit. Then it will be too late.
-
Dsb2k6
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:01 p.m.It doesnt prove Loose Change 2nd Edition to be true, but it does outline the fact that government officials are deceitful. That in itself makes Loose Change's conspiracy theory possible. If they would lie about something that simple you think they wouldnt lie about something so intricate?
-
Krazymk
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:01 p.m.Did any of these folks even read the article? Based off of comments like:
"Kinda gives a little credence to those so call conspiracy theories now doesn't it"
"Of course former SecNav Lehman would say there isn't evidence to warrant a criminal investigation. He's one of those Bohemian grove attendees in the past, whose shown that he's now part of the Neo-Con support group."
"Oh more lies, whoa what a surprise there.
votetoimpeach.org Vote to impeach Bush"
I don't think any of them bothered to even look beyond the headline. This has nothing to do with Bush, Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, or anyone other than the people who were supposed to be watching the radar screens.
-
gbmoney
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:02 p.m.bet alex jones is having a field day with this one. too bad it actually makes the conspiracy theory even less truthful because all it seems to state is that someone lied to cover their rearend. it basically shows that communication in bureaucracies are really bad. man thats news to me. (sarcasm).
-
moeberg
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:02 p.m.It is deception like this that encourages wild rumors about the towers being destroyed from within. A bungled 9/11, a bungled war and a bungled government. It is all of a piece.
-
jkbella
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:03 p.m.Yes, it does give some credence to the conspiracy nuts.
Those that would steal the American good will of the people, their resources, and their government thrive on the ignorance of the people. Open the festering wound, let's clean it out in the sunshine-even if it hurts.
-
gbmoney
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:08 p.m.i love it when people call bush stupid then turn around and say that he was able to pull off the greatest heist in known history. and on top of that, he was able to cover his tracks so well that all people can come up with is a machine gun shredded conspiracy theory. thats what i call stupid.
-
stephen-johnson
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:08 p.m.truth_only: "Really? Please tell me in history when 15 simultaneous excersises were being ran the same day?"
How about some documentation of that? Or are we expected to accept your word only?
Krazymk: "Did any of these folks even read the article? Based off of comments like..."
They *can't* read. Or if they can, they can't understand what they're reading.
-
rstinva
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:26 p.m.It does appear as tho some butt covering took place. But the larger question is how derelict were they in their duties? How much, if any, damage could have been prevented? I doubt that anything could have been done to prevent the carnage at NYC. Flight 93 did not accomplish its mission. But the Pentagon...could that have been prevented? Probably not, but still, why the butt covering?
-
mikevr007
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:28 p.m.So obviously you believe their conclusion that they MAY have been misleading. Interesting.
I don't give the panel much credence, especially after reading the multiple reports they have "come up" with.
Do yourself a favor. Read their reports and cross reference their "data" with other sources.
-
vor
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:29 p.m."Although the commission's landmark report made it clear that the Defense Department's early versions of events on the day of the attacks were inaccurate, the revelation that it considered criminal referrals reveals how skeptically those reports were viewed by the panel and provides a glimpse of the tension between it and the Bush administration."
Will we ever know the truth? Doubtful I suspect. The timing of 9/11 is particularly problematic. Cheney had all of these grand schemes in mind when this administration took office. Yet there was no way at that time that the American people were going to send troops overseas to re-invade Iraq or on any other misadventure. 9/11 immediately changed all of that.
I usually detest conspiracy theories, JFK was one of the worst films I have ever seen. But something stinks here and the American public deserves answers. As secretive as this administration is we wont have them any time soon
-
Twistoflex
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:30 p.m.I linked this article in the Washington Post yesterday. This article, like all lapdog media publications, only tells a fraction of the story.
Max Cleland, one of the 9/11 Commissioners resigned because the the Director and Chairman refused to subpoena any documents whatsoever from the government - even when they were refused by the WH. Cleland made very frank remarks at the time that the Commission was a WH coverup and that the WH was defrauding the people.
Who ever heard of an investigation compromising with the targets of the investigation? You don't compromise, you subpoena! That's what Cleland said to deaf ears. Among those deaf ears was the lapdog corporate media. There were big war profits to be made.
-
-
ahriman01
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:37 p.m.Despite all the elaborate theories that are bumping around out there, it may just be as simple as the U.S. govt. not stopping what they knew may be coming. I personally don't think that our govt. would be dumb enough to help the towers fall, they just stepped out of the way. This would justify the future wars we are fighting (and preparing to fight) right now.
-
stephen-johnson
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:42 p.m.truth_only:
Michael C. Ruppert = Conspiracy theorist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ruppert
-
vor
Aug. 2, 2006, 3:55 p.m.uhhh if we wanted to invade iraq, please explain to me why NONE OF THE HIJACKERS WERE IRAQI???
why would we fly planes into a building when a dirty bomb done by a few iraqis suppoerted by saddam would have been MUCH easier to fake and gotten BETTER results???
duhhh. I have had some half witted responses to posts but this beats them all. I said something stinks here. Explain to me then why we are in Iraq when none of the hijackers were Iraqi? None of this makes sense yet you ask me to make sense of it.
One thing is for sure and that is that Cheney and the other PNAC neo-cons WERE hellbent on going into Iraq. Isn't it possible they let this attack go forward? That seems to be the real issue. What's a few thousand bodies to these people? Cheney has said as much indirectly.
The first 25 comments are shown. Show all 663 comments »
Submitted By:
Neophile
I'm a Propeller Scout so if you have any questions or concerns, send me a message and I'll be happy to help.
Also submitted:
